ISSUE
An IBWA Member Value of IBWA
Environmental
Membership
Success Story

BOTTLED WATER REPORTER | JUNE / JULY 2013

BOTTLED WATER
INDUSTRY GATHERING

STRENGTH

2012 Statistics Reveal Bottled Water’s
U.S. and International Growth

Home and Office
Delivery Highlights
BPA Facts to Share
With Customers
Fleet Trends
Mobile Technology and the
Small Business Owner
Occupational Hearing Loss:
The Silent Epidemic
A PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL BOTTLED WATER ASSOCIATION

VOL. 53 • NO. 4

COLUMNS
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS

24 | Now Is the Time
A call to action for water cooler
manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers
COMMUNICATIONS

26 | The Next Battleground:
America’s National Parks
Working to keep U.S. National Parks
visitors healthfully hydrated
TECHNICAL UPDATE

28 | Environmental Success Story
The impressive steps taken by IBWA member
Portola Packaging for energy conservation
VALUE OF IBWA MEMBERSHIP

The growth of the bottled water industry in 2012 was the strongest it had been in five years.
While the carbonated soft drink category suffered its eighth consecutive year of volume
reduction, bottled water volume achieved an unprecedented high, spurred by consumers
continuing to embrace it as a healthful alternative to other beverages. By John G. Rodwan, Jr.

CONNECT WITH IBWA

21 | What’s All the Noise Over
Hearing Protection?
Occupational hearing loss has become a silent epidemic in the United States, and its
impact on employees’ quality of life—and on employers’ workers’ compensation claim
costs—cannot be ignored. By Adele L. Abrams, Esq.

BOTTLED WATER REPORTER, Volume 53, Number 4.
Published six times a year by The Goetz Printing
Company, 7939 Angus Court, Springfield, VA, 22153,
for the International Bottled Water Association, 1700
Diagonal Road, Suite 650, Alexandria, VA 22314-2973.
Tel: 703.683.5213, Fax: 703.683.4074,
www.bottledwaterreporter.org.
Subscription rate for members is $25 per year, which is
included in the dues. U.S. and Canadian subscription rate
to nonmembers is $50 per year. International subscription
rate is $100 per year. Single copies are $7. POSTMASTER:
Send address changes to Bottled Water Reporter, 1700
Diagonal Road, Suite 650, Alexandria, VA 22314-2973.

IBWA

International Bottled Water Association

CHAIRMAN’S COMMENTARY
HELPFUL, HEALTHFUL HOD

In our feature story “Bottled Water Industry Gathering Strength,”
Beverage Marketing Corporation (BMC) research shows a 2.5
percent growth in volume for the home and office delivery (HOD)
segment of the bottled water industry in 2012. That measured
growth was despite, as the author notes, “intramural competition
from handy, portable PET bottles.”
HOD businesses are proud to continue the centuries-old service of ensuring that safe,
convenient bottled water is delivered directly to the doorsteps and workplaces of the
consumers who choose it. While we now rely on high-efficiency vehicles and not horsedrawn carriages to deliver products, our mission remains the same: provide consumers
with safe and convenient bottled water products to help them stay hydrated and healthy.
As we move forward in 2013 to grow our businesses, it’s a good time for IBWA members
to pause and examine if we are doing everything we can to help educate consumers, the
media, and legislators about HOD. We have a good story to tell.
For example, in your messaging to customers, remind them of the vital role HOD
plays in helping them live a healthy and well-hydrated life. Studies have shown that a
water cooler in the home and office can encourage people to drink more water.
Customers also like to hear about our “use, return, clean, reuse, recycle” environmentally
friendly HOD process.
With the media, we can emphasize the ongoing confirmation of the safety of bisphenol-A (BPA) by regulatory agencies around the world—including the United States,
Canada, Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand.
And in discussions with legislators, it might be helpful to remind them that, although the
bottled water industry originated out of necessity because public water systems (PWSs)
weren’t yet available, tap water is not bottled water’s competition: other packaged beverages are. So, legislators and their staffs might find it interesting to read research showing
that bottled water has the smallest carbon footprint of all packaged beverages. It is also
helpful to share with legislators the bottled water economic impact within their districts.
As members of IBWA, we are our best allies. We best know the efforts our companies
go through to provide a safe, quality bottled water product that is environmentally
sustainable. Our continuing education of consumers, the media, and legislators will
help create a more balanced view of bottled water.
William Patrick Young
IBWA Chairman

This issue of Bottled Water Reporter is special because in it we
present a 2012 bottled water industry statistics article from Beverage Marketing Corporation (BMC) and spotlight the home and
office delivery (HOD) segment of our industry.
After experiencing slight losses during the recessionary times of 2008 and 2009,
bottled water sales and volume returned to growth in 2010 and showed renewed
strength in 2011. And as we learn in “Bottled Water Industry Gathering Strength,”
an article authored by BMC’s John Rodwan, Jr., industry growth in 2012 was the
strongest is had been in five years, with volume production increasing by 6.2 percent.
We also learn that carbonated soft drinks, while remaining the largest beverage
type in the United States, experienced another reduction in volume—for the eighth
consecutive year. According to Rodwan, “Changes in per capita consumption indicate
persistent interest in a product that consumers embrace as a healthful alternative
to other beverages.” In addition, BMC forecasts that the U.S. consumers’ already
displayed thirst for bottled water will continue in the years ahead.
IBWA’s HOD members play a major role in meeting that proven consumer demand
for bottled water. Thus, in this issue we also focus on topics of interest to the HOD
segment of the bottled water industry: bisphenol-A (BPA) facts (worth sharing with
your customers), fleet trends, and small business technology tips. In addition, this
issue’s Government Relations column, “Now Is the Time,” presents a “call to action”
for members who are water cooler manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers to help
IBWA staff educate legislators about industry concerns with the scheduled ENERGY
STAR standby energy consumption standard.
Our other columns highlight industry challenges and successes. In the
Communications column, we provide an update on the attempt by some anti-bottled
water groups to ban bottled water from the U.S. National Park System; and in
Technical Update, we showcase the admirable environmental sustainability efforts of
IBWA member Portola Packaging.
As always, I hope you find the articles and information provided in this issue of Bottled
Water Reporter enlightening and helpful. Please let us know if you have any article
suggestions or would like to contribute text to an upcoming issue.

assessment is that BPA is safe at the
very low levels that occur in some foods.
This assessment is based on review by
FDA scientists of hundreds of studies
including the latest findings from
new studies initiated by the agency.”
For more, visit http://www.fda.gov/
NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/
ucm064437.htm.
In 2012, FDA rejected a citizen
petition from the Natural Resources
Defense Council (NRDC) seeking
to ban BPA from all food and drink
packaging, including plastic bottles
and canned food. FDA stated that its
“assessment is that the scientific evidence at this time does not suggest that
the very low levels of human exposure
to BPA through the diet are unsafe.”

BPA is Proven to Be Safe:
So why are customers still confused?

Due to the misinformation often published about bisphenol-A (BPA), a chemical
compound used in polycarbonate plastic bottles, it’s no wonder that consumers
have questions. Some home and office delivery (HOD) bottled water businesses
elect to use PET beverage containers (which do not contain BPA); still others opt
to use 3- and 5-gallon polycarbonate plastic bottles as their container-of-choice to
hold up against the wear-and-tear expected from a business that centers around
returnable, reusable containers.
For bottled water bottlers, when communicating with customers about the
polycarbonate plastic bottles in your float, here are a few facts you’ll want to make
sure to share:
The U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) approves
the use of polycarbonate plastic
containers for food contact. Because
the FDA comprehensively regulates
bottled water as a food product, the
agency approves all food-contact plastics
for their intended use based on migration
and safety data. Plastic food and beverage
containers, including polycarbonate
plastic bottles made with BPA, must meet
or exceed all FDA requirements.
6

BWR

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

Polycarbonate plastic has been the
material of choice for many food and
beverage product containers for more
than 50 years. Bottled water bottlers
like it because it is lightweight, highly
shatter-resistant, and transparent.
As recently as March 2013, FDA
reconfirmed its opinion that BPA
is safe for food contact. Issuing
what it calls a BPA consumer update,
the agency stated, “FDA’s current

FDA isn’t the only regulatory agency
confirming the safety of BPA. Others
include Health Canada; the European
Food Safety Authority (EFSA); Japan’s
Research Institute of Science for Safety
and Sustainability (RISS), a division of
the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST);
the German Federal Institute for Risk
Assessment (BfR); and Food Standards
Australia New Zealand (FSANZ).
BPA does not pose a risk to pregnant
mothers or fetuses. In April 2013,
FDA and the National Toxicology
Program (NTP) studying the metabolic
pathways of BPA published a study that
found BPA does not cause harm to pregnant mothers or their unborn fetuses.
For more, visit www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pubmed/23261975.
For more information about BPA, visit
IBWA’s website (www.bottledwater.org)
and the American Chemistry Council’s
website (http://factsaboutbpa.org).

WATER NOTES: ALL THINGS HOD

Products Made With BPA

When educating consumers,
the media, and legislators about
BPA, sometimes it’s a good idea
to let them know that BPA is a
key component used to make
polycarbonate plastic and epoxy
resins that are found in products
we use each day.
Food Packaging and Storage.
Polycarbonate plastic is strong,
lightweight, and shatter-resistant, which makes it an excellent
choice for water bottles and
food storage containers.
Safety. Automobile bumpers,
protective gear used by police
and military personnel, and
bicycle and motorcycle helmets
are examples of products made
with polycarbonate plastic. Even
protective eyewear worn by athletes and scientists is made from
polycarbonate plastic.
Environment. Plastics and resins
made with BPA have environmental benefits.
Durable and lightweight
polycarbonate auto components
help to decrease vehicle weight
and increase fuel efficiency, thereby reducing carbon emissions.
Medical equipment made
with polycarbonate components can withstand repeated
sterilization, which enables the
reuse of devices.
Coatings made from epoxy
resins help make flooring and
other materials durable and
long-lasting, requiring less
frequent repair and replacement.
Medical Applications. Polycarbonate plastic is used in eyeglass
lenses because it is shatter and
scratch resistant. The highperformance, optical clarity
and heat resistant qualities of
polycarbonate make it a plastic
of choice for many vital medical
devices. Kidney dialyzers, heartlung machines, and incubators
all contain components made of
polycarbonate.
Source: http://factsaboutbpa.
org/how-is-bpa-used/products

FLEET TRENDS

LIFE ON THE HIGHWAY
According to the 2013 BeverageWorld
fleet report, the fleet managers
surveyed, which included those who
work for bottled water producers and
distributors, are equally split between
the type of vehicle configuration they
prefer. Slightly more than half of the
respondents say their fleet consists of
conventional trucks with a side-load
body; 46 percent use a tractor with a
48-foot dry van trailer.
Always concerned about the
bottom line and ways to increase
fleet efficiencies, these fleet managers
say they will be looking to replace
older, less-efficient vehicles in the
next 12 months. Respondents
show an interest in adopting some
type of fuel management system
or even giving natural gas vehicles a
trial run during the next 12 months.
The expressed interest in natural gas
stems from the fact that it is sourced
domestically; thus, its price is more
stable. In addition, it is a clean-burning
fuel that has reduced emissions. One
negative: because this technology is in
its infancy, the infrastructure to make it
readily available is still being developed.
California is one state that has a more
established natural gas infrastructure.
As the volatility of the fuel market
is a major concern, 50 percent of
respondents plan to purchase or
lease alternative fuel vehicles during
the next year. And the “lease or buy
debate” continues, as 44.4 percent
of beverage producers indicate they
lease their vehicles. Of those that
lease vehicles, 71.4 percent have a
full-service vehicle lease agreement,
but, of their entire fleets, only 20-49
percent are under those full-service
lease agreements.

Many fleet managers praise the
advantages of remote vehicle/tracking
systems. According to the BeverageWorld report, more than 42 percent
of survey respondents are using that
technology. Beverage producers also
seem to be more willing to spend
money to prevent back-up/blind spot
accidents, with 47 percent purchasing avoidance-related technology (24
percent of distributors invested in that
type of on-board technology).
Vehicle safety continues to be a
main concern, with almost 85 percent
of responding fleet managers citing it
as a problem. Fuel price volatility was
obviously another big concern.
Respondents said that their route
delivery vehicles have a lifecycle of
between five and nine years. Obviously,
weather, terrain, street conditions,
and geography all have an effect on
the wear and tear of a vehicle. Tires,
brakes, and engines, as one would
expect, were indicated as the leading
areas for maintenance costs.
Respondents also note that more
than 50 percent of unscheduled
repairs were in the area of starting
and charting (including alternator
and battery starter)—57 percent—as
well as engine repairs—53.6 percent.
Collision damage was third on the list
at 46.4 percent, followed by drivetrain
at 36 percent and brakes at 32 percent.
Preventive maintenance, however,
remains a big function performed by
operators with more than 95 percent
saying that preventive measures are
taken in-house to ensure minimal
damage to vehicles.
Source: www.beverageworld.com/
articles/full/15604/rolling-forward

JUNE/JULY 2013

BWR

7

WATER NOTES: ALL THINGS HOD

BUSINESS STRATEGY

Mobile Technology and
the Small Business Owner
Results from a March 2013
Constant Contact survey show
that 66 percent of small business owners use mobile devices
or solutions (e.g., social media
marketing, apps) as part of
their operations. Mostly, they
use smartphones or tablets to
conduct social media marketing (73 percent) or to conduct
email marketing (71 percent).

If you are a small business
owner wondering what type
of mobile or social advertising
your competition is currently
using, you’ll be interested
to learn that 97 percent of
survey respondents said
they employ platforms like
YouTube, Pinterest, Twitter,
Facebook, and Instagram.
(Notably, according to a

recent report from Simply Measured, a group of
self-described “data geeks,”
Instagram is considered more
effective than Pinterest.)
More than ever, consumers
depend upon their smartphones and other mobile
devices to find information,
look for deals, and make purchases—and small business

How are small businesses using mobile technology?
80%

73%

71%

70%
60%
50%

44%

40%

34%

30%

18%

20%

18%

10%
0

g

e

al M

i
Soc

dia

ail

Em

BWR

rk
Ma

gh

e

rtis

e
Adv

8

g

etin

etin

rk
Ma

ou
Thr

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

S

oci

la
al P

ms

ite

tfor

M

ize

tim

Op

leobi

ebs
dW

Use

S

le A

bi
Mo

ns

atio

PO

ay
dP

ase

B
let-

ab
le/T

bi
Mo

nt
me

ana

M
s to

ge

er
Op

pp

Source: Constant Contact Mobile

owners recognize that, says
Joel Hughes, Constant Contact’s senior vice president
of strategy and corporate
development.
The survey results also
show that 70 percent of small
businesses have websites that
are social-media optimized.
Other findings:
• 44 percent contain a menu.
• 40 percent contain individual product listings.
• 39 percent contain videos.
Wonder who is winning
the iOS vs. Android battle?
For small business owners, the clear winner is the
iPhone, which garnered a 66
percent to 39 percent advantage in Constant Contact’s
survey. (The iPad trumps
Android tablets, 49 percent to
15 percent). In addition, small
business owners are using
those devices for point-of-sale
(POS) functions, with 71
percent using mobile technology to accept payments and
52 percent using a mobile-/
tablet-based POS system.
READ MORE:
• http://www.marketingprofs.
com/charts/2013/10791/
how-small-businessowners-are-usingmobile-technology
• http://news.
constantcontact.com/
research/5713-sixtysix-percent-smallbusiness-owners-usemobile-technology
• http://simplymeasured.com/

WATER NOTES: ALL THINGS HOD

DID YOU KNOW?

Content Needs to Be Shareable

Brands have become publishers, and social networks such as Facebook and Twitter are
slowly overtaking email as the most popular way to share content.
0.5%

Sharing by platform
3.4%

2.8

0.9%
8.7%

9.7%

Email
Facebook
Twitter

27.4%

LinkedIn
Others

93.3%

Feb 2010

53.3%

Feb 2013

Instagram, Pinterest, Keep, and Vine are among the social networks whose popularity is
rapidly increasing.
Source: www.uberflip.com

TOOLS

Need to Compare
Handhelds?
Check out this
helpful website:
http://tinyurl.com/
czbsv38.
You’ll be able to
compare detailed
specifications
from handhelds in
RuggedPCReview’s
computer database.

REGIONAL ASSOCIATIONS

Get to Know NWBWA

In this new, reoccurring series, you’ll learn more about the individual state and regional
bottled water associations. For this issue, Bottled Water Reporter (BWR) interviewed Tim
Dougherty, the executive director of the Northwest Bottled Water Association (NWBWA).
BWR: Tell us a little bit about NWBWA.
Tim Dougherty: NWBWA is approximately 110 members
strong with an almost even split among bottlers and
suppliers. While our members mainly come from Alaska,
Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington, we’ve had
members from several other states who are searching for
the best fit in a state and regional association. We have
had some members from northern California and as far
away as Texas.
BWR: It seems that NWBW has a large amount of
members involved in home and office delivery (HOD). Why
do you think this is so?
TD: Most of NWBWA members are HOD. While some will
dabble in both HOD and small pack, there are only a few
NWBWA members who only do packaged product. Since
NWBWA members tend to be smaller, family-owned and
operated companies, those tend to be more in the business
of HOD. And with the love of coffee in this part of the
country, now some of our members are starting to include
coffee and tea services along with their HOD services.
BWR: What are the biggest challenges you see for NWBWA?

TD: Distribution is always an issue for our members. While
you have a handful of major markets, getting products out
to more rural areas is definitely challenging for NWBWA
members. As with most of us in the industry, keeping the
business growing is always a concern and then being able
to keep up with that growth while still providing the best
service possible.One thing we don’t lack in the Northwest is
good water! Efforts to keep the water clean and sustainable
can often lead to issues with government oversight that are
prevalent in Oregon and Washington. But NWBWA keeps on
top of that and has had several opportunities to meet with
key decision makers to voice our concerns and thoughts.
BWR: What does the future hold for NWBWA and the
bottled water industry in the Northwest?
TD: While water is an age-old business, it has only really
developed in the Northwest over the last 15 years. At
NWBWA, we strive to provide our members with the best
access to information and education on the bottled water
industry. We also are a very involved association with
members who are acutely aware of industry issues and
how to ensure that they are doing all they can to make a
difference. The partnership between NWBWA and IBWA
is a key component in making this a reality.

Whether you turn to BMC to help you develop
strategies and tactics, benchmark your progress,
evaluate an opportunity or provide a third party reality
check for your own beliefs and hypotheses, BMC offers
perspective gained through years of unrivaled access
to industry leaders coupled with the solid history of
data integrity you need to light your way.

Many research reports and data services focus almost
exclusively on select retail channels (scanner or
measured channels), virtually ignoring the rest of the
market! BMC Reports provide a total market vantage
point that includes all volume, plus category breakouts by key sales channels. Whether a beverage is
produced on-premise or off-, whether it is sold via
large chains or small independent grocery stores,
c-stores, foodservice, mass merchandisers, club-stores,
Wal-Mart, vending, etc., you can be confident it is
included in our market totals. With this all-inclusive,
100% of volume and dollar sales view as your starting
point, you won’t miss a thing!

After more than four decades serving the beverage
industry, Beverage Marketing Corp. continues to
innovate, while tailoring our solutions to meet your
ever-changing data and insight requirements. This
year, in addition to our new logo and our re-designed
corporate website (beveragemarketing.com), we’re
excited about the ever-expanding depth of our
reports, databases and value-added services designed
to illuminate trends and provide the data you need,
where, when and how you need it.

UR

E S T O TA L M A R

KE

T

COVER STORY

2012 STATISTICS REVEAL
BOTTLED WATER’S U.S. AND
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH

BOTTLED WATER INDUSTRY

By John G. Rodwan, Jr.

BOTTLED WATER ATTAINED A PROMINENT POSITION IN THE U.S. BEVERAGE
MARKETPLACE AS A RESULT OF MANY YEARS OF VIGOROUS GROWTH, AND,
WITH ANOTHER FORCEFUL ASCENT IN 2012, IT ONCE AGAIN FLASHED ITS
PENCHANT FOR UPWARD MOVEMENT.
As with many other beverage categories in the
United States during the depths of the economic
recession, bottled water suffered reversals in 2008
and 2009. In 2010, bottled water volume and
sales returned to growth, and the category showed
renewed strength by both measures in 2011.
Growth in 2012 was the strongest it had been in
five years. Moreover, preliminary data indicates
that the category could cross another noteworthy threshold by exceeding 10 billion gallons
for the first time in 2013. Further still, ongoing
enlargement should continue going forward as
economic conditions grow increasingly favorable
and the characteristics that made bottled water
the second-largest beverage category by volume
unambiguously reassert themselves.
Bottled water enjoyed a unique position within the
overall liquid refreshment beverage marketplace, as
the performance of other categories makes vividly
evident. Though carbonated soft drinks remain by
far the largest beverage type in the United States,
their volume shrank again in 2012, as it has done
every year since the mid-2000s. Fruit beverages

have similarly been beset with long-term erosion,
withering from having volume comparable to
bottled water in the late 1990s to having volume
only slightly more than one-third the size by
2012. Like bottled water, other, friskier liquid
refreshment beverages—such as ready-to-drink
tea and sports beverages—rebounded from
back-to-back off years to grow in 2010, 2011, and
2012, but they remained much, much smaller
than bottled water. Although sports beverages (like Gatorade) may actively compete for
consumers seeking hydration, their volume was
about one-sixth that of bottled water in 2012.
Before the economic challenges at the end of the
century’s first decade, bottled water experienced
a remarkable streak of speedy volume growth, as
documented in the latest edition of Bottled Water
in the U.S., Beverage Marketing Corporation’s

JUNE/JULY 2013

BWR

13

In 2012, the bottled water
industry experienced its
strongest growth in five years.
U.S. BOTTLED WATER MARKET
Volume and Producer Revenues
2010 – 2012
Year

annual analysis of the market. During the 2000s, bottled
water volume achieved double-digit percentage growth
rates in two years and advanced at rates close to that level
in several others. Bottled water volume grew by close to 12
percent in 2002, and after growing by 10.8 percent in 2005,
it enlarged by 9.5 percent in 2006. Departing from the
pattern of preceding years, bottled water volume declined by
1.0 percent in 2008 and then by 2.5 percent in 2009.
Unlike carbonated soft drinks, which followed several years
of slow growth with multiple volume reductions, bottled
water demonstrated that two consecutive declines were
aberrations, mere blips, not the start of a protracted losing
streak. When bottled water growth resumed in 2010, it
restored volume to where it had been prior to the declines.
Growth accelerated in each of the two following years.
By 2012, volume achieved an unprecedented high—more
than 920 million gallons above where it had been in 2007.
In contrast, the soft drink category suffered its eighth
consecutive year of volume reduction in 2012.
Bottled water producers’ revenues also declined in both
2008 and 2009 as well, and did so more precipitously than
volume, but enjoyed revitalization thereafter. Bottled water
wholesale dollar sales first exceeded $6 billion in 2000. By
2007, they topped $11.5 billion. Category sales declined by
more than 3 percent to $11.2 billion the following year and
14

BWR

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

then by more than 5 percent to $10.6 billion in 2009. They
inched upward in 2010 and climbed back above $11 billion
in 2011. Wholesale dollars scaled new heights in 2012,
when they topped $11.8 billion.
All signs point to U.S. consumers’ already displayed thirst
for bottled water continuing in the years ahead. Changes
in per capita consumption indicate persistent interest in
a product that consumers embrace as a healthful alternative to other beverages. Americans upped their annual
consumption by almost 11 gallons from 20.1 gallons per
person in 2002 to 30.8 gallons ten years later. During
the same period, per capita consumption of carbonated
soft drinks dropped by more than 10 gallons. Per capita
consumption of other major beverage categories, like milk
and fruit beverages, also declined. Other types, including
coffee and tea, were characterized by stability, though the
ready-to-drink versions of both categories made gains.
Indeed, those beverages associated with beneficial properties and functional benefits—a subset that includes
packaged water as well as energy drinks, sports beverages,
and ready-to-drink tea—were the most resilient elements
of the beverage market in 2010, 2011, and 2012. Even
so, average intake of beverages within bottled water’s
competitive set, such as ready-to-drink tea and sports
beverages, remained fractions of bottled water’s per capita

2012 STATISTICS
consumption level. Indeed, bottled water added more
gallons to its per-person consumption rate in ten years
than either ready-to-drink tea or sports beverages reached
by the end of that period. In fact, neither even reached
5 gallons per U.S. consumer by 2012. Bottled water
proved itself to be not only a key component of the liquid
refreshment beverage market but also poised for future
increases in per capita consumption.
Several reasons exist to explain U.S. consumers’ sustained
enthusiasm for bottled water. Those include its associations with healthfulness, convenience, safety, and value.
Bottled water’s versatility makes it suitable for consumption at any time of day and in practically any setting or
situation. It doesn’t need to be kept cold (like soft drinks
or juice) or warm (like conventional coffee or tea). Various
packaging types, ranging from bulk to single-serve, facilitate a variety of uses. Among ready-to-drink commercial
beverages in its competitive set, bottled water is relatively
inexpensive. Further, due to aggressive pricing, especially
in the retail PET segment, it has become more and more
affordable for consumers. Consumers’ interest in beverages
that deliver benefits above and beyond simple refreshment
also contributes to the quintessential hydrating beverage’s ascension in the beverage rankings. In the midst of
pervasive worries about obesity and other health matters,
bottled water’s lack of calories and artificial ingredients attracts conscientious consumers. Even where tap water may

Bottled water
competes for
market share with
other packaged
beverages—
not tap water.
be safely potable, many people prefer bottled water, which
they regard as superior in taste. The ready availability of
packaged water wherever beverages are sold also crucially
differentiates bottled water from tap.
Even though it has sometimes been compared with tap
water, bottled water actually achieved its market stature by
enticing consumers away from other packaged beverages
perceived as less wholesome than bottled water. While
some consumers may have turned away from regular, fullcalorie sodas in favor of their diet versions, many others
moved over to bottled water instead.
Challenges to beverage market growth appear to have
eased somewhat since the late 2000s. Energy, commodity, and other input costs contributed to higher prices for
consumers. That drove them to seek savings by opting
for smaller, more affordable unit sizes, eschewing pricier
imports, or occasionally foregoing packaged beverages
altogether, which largely explains what happened in 2008
and 2009. The situation has now changed, and favorably so,
from bottled water marketers’ perspectives.

Category Developments
Domestic non-sparkling water regularly reigns as the largest segment of the U.S. packaged water industry. Domestic
non-sparkling water’s 9.3 billion gallons represented 96
percent of total volume in 2012. As a whole, domestic nonsparkling saw slower volume reductions than the overall
market in 2008 and 2009 and then outperformed it again
in 2010, 2011, and 2012.
The non-sparkling category includes various components
that typically follow divergent trajectories. In 2012, for the
second year in a row, all four segments registered growth.
Although each advanced at very different rates, every one
of them grew faster than they had in the previous year.
Throughout most of the 1990s and 2000s, the retail
premium segment—consisting of still water in single-serve
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles—drove the overall category’s development. Indeed, the PET component
enlarged by a double-digit percentage rate 16 consecutive
JUNE/JULY 2013

BWR

15

Domestic
non-sparkling water
accounted
for almost all
per capita
bottled water
consumption in 2012.

of competition from PET. After multiple declines, the
segment did grow in 2011 and 2012. Even so, retail bulk’s
1.8 percent uptick was the slightest of any domestic still
water segment in 2012. Direct delivery also confronted
intramural competition from handy, portable PET
bottles. The segment, which comprised the largest of
them all as recently as the mid-1990s, accounted for 12.4
percent of total volume by 2012. U.S. home and office
delivery (HOD) volume slipped from close to 1.4 billion
gallons in the early 2000s to 1.2 billion gallons in 2012,
when volume moved up by 2.5 percent.
The relatively small, essentially regional vending segment involving refillable jug containers achieved growth even in the
years when total bottled water volume declined. Its low cost
during economic hard times undoubtedly had something
to do with vending’s positive results. It continued to grow in
2012, albeit at a far slower rate than either the domestic still
water market or the bottled water market as a whole.

times through 2007. Growth slowed markedly in 2008
before it disappeared in 2009. Yet, PET’s 0.9 percent reduction was far less than the 2.5 percent loss measured for
bottled water in general. Besides, PET volume in 2009 of
almost 5.2 billion gallons stood more than 4.1 billion gallons
higher than it had in 1999, and its share of total bottled
water swelled from 24 percent to more than 61 percent
during that ten-year period. In 2010, PET experienced the
strongest growth of any bottled water segment, advancing
by 6.8 percent to 5.5 billion gallons, which boosted its share
above 63 percent. Growth slowed in 2011 but remained
well in advance of the total market: volume greater than 5.8
billion gallons flowed from growth of 5.4 percent, which
pushed PET’s share to 64 percent. In 2012, the segment saw
its strongest showing since 2007, increasing by more than 8
percent to 6.3 billion gallons, which represented 65 percent
of the overall market.

One of the two segments outside the domestic nonsparkling realm showed renewed vigor in 2012; the other,
to put it mildly, did not. The imported water segment, the
smallest of them all, is prone to fluctuations. In the 2000s,
it registered double-digit percentage growth in some
years, and equally sizeable contractions in others. After
one of those up years in 2007, imported water’s volume
fell sharply in 2008 and then plummeted precipitously in
2009. It continued to shrink in 2010 before inching up by
a modest clip in 2011. Volume dropped dramatically again
in 2012. Sparkling water held a small share of bottled
water volume but grew at a rate faster than any other type,
including retail PET, in 2012.

Retail bulk volume experienced some setbacks as more
and more consumers selected convenient PET multipacks
in large format retail channels instead of larger (1 to 2.5
gallon) sizes. Its share eroded from nearly one-quarter of
the category volume at the beginning of the century to
slightly more than 10 percent by 2012, largely as a result

As usual, domestic non-sparkling water accounted for
almost all per capita bottled water consumption in 2012.
Sparkling water and imports each represented less than one
gallon per person. (With imports, the figure actually worked

2012 STATISTICS
out to about one-third of a gallon per U.S. resident.) In the
key PET portion, average intake moved from less than 8 gallons in 2002 to more than 20 gallons ten years later.

International Developments
Bottled water emerged as a beverage industry phenomenon not only in the United States—the current No. 1
market in terms of volume—but also in virtually every
major geographical region of the world. Bottled water first
became a large, mainstream commercial beverage category
in Western Europe, where, consumption of it has long been
part of many residents’ daily routine. It is now a truly global
beverage, found even in some of the more remote corners of
the globe. Several Asian markets achieved strong growth to
become major bottled water markets during the 2000s. In
fact, Asia itself became the largest regional market in 2011,
edging out North America and easily besting Europe; China
claimed the No. 2 position, ahead of Mexico, which long
held the spot. While China remained in second place in
2012, it looked poised to take the lead, which it in all likelihood will do during 2013.
Global bottled water consumption is estimated to have
neared 65.8 billion gallons in 2012, according to data from
the latest edition of Beverage Marketing’s The Global Bottled
Water Market. Total consumption swelled by almost 7
percent in 2012. Per capita consumption of 9.2 gallons represented a gain of 1.6 gallons over the course of five years.
Clearly, per capita consumption by individual region or
country can diverge significantly from the global average.
For instance, several Western European countries have per
capita consumption levels far above 25 gallons, and the No.
1 market exceeded 68 gallons per person in 2012. At the
same time, however, much of the developing world, where
the bulk of the world’s population resides, finds its per
capita consumption figures still in the single-digit range.
Although the global per capita consumption figure
obscures pronounced regional disparities, bottled water’s
global growth points to demand for it in diverse markets.
Consumers have demonstrated a thirst for it in highly
developed markets, in less developed ones, and in
economies in transition. Bottled water tapped into some
different consumer trends around the globe. In developed
countries such as the United States and Canada, bottled
water became a particularly dynamic major commercial
beverage category by registering as an appealing option for
health-conscious consumers. Marketers positioned bottled
water as a virtuous alternative to carbonated soft drinks
and fruit juice drinks (some of which comprise sizeable
portions of their own product portfolios). The developed
world came to see bottled water as not only a way of

Bottled water
is now a
truly global
beverage,
found even in some
of the more remote
corners of the globe.
achieving hydration but also as a functional beverage.
At the same time, bottled water serves at least a partial
solution to the problem of often-unsafe water found in
many economically developing countries.
Much of the world’s bottled water market is still
highly fragmented and controlled by local brands, but
consolidation is definitely taking place, as four companies
have come to dominate much of the market. Swiss food
and beverage giant Nestlé and France’s Danone are
the traditional leaders of the bottled water pack. Both
companies initially centered their operations around the
core markets of Western Europe and the United States.
However, as water growth is increasingly coming from
the developing world, Nestlé and Danone have expanded
their initiatives to the competitive fields of Asia, Latin
America, and other areas. In fact, Danone stepped back
from the U.S. market to concentrate on some of those
other markets. Soft drink industry leaders Coca-Cola
and PepsiCo also entered the bottled water arena. After
achieving solid positions in the United States, both
companies increasingly devoted resources and energy to
developing their global bottled water businesses.
North America boasts two of the three largest individual
bottled water markets—the United States and Mexico—
which together accounted for 26.6 percent of the world’s
packaged water market in 2012. Although the U.S. bottled
water market had been a catalyst for much of the global
expansion up until the mid-2000s, its compound annual
growth rate (CAGR) of 2.0 percent for the five-year period
ending with 2012 was noticeably slower than the 5.7 percent CAGR achieved by the growth of the global market
during the same period. Mexico alone accounted for 11.9
percent of the global volume with 7.8 billion gallons in
2012 and a market-beating CAGR of 5.9 percent.
China was the only other country that could claim a doubledigit share of global volume with 9.6 billion gallons, or
14.6 percent of the total (or just one-tenth of a share point
JUNE/JULY 2013

behind the United States). Chinese bottled water volume
enjoyed double-digit percentage growth rates for several
consecutive years, registering a 14.9 percent CAGR for the
period from 2007 to 2012—the highest rate among the five
biggest bottled water markets and sufficiently muscular to
vault it over Mexico and put it on the path to surpassing the
United States in stature. Fourth-place Brazil’s CAGR lagged
the international market, but fifth-place Indonesia moved
well ahead of it. Sixth-place Thailand, the No. 3 Asian
market, grew faster still.
Europe may not boast any of the biggest bottled water
markets, but it does have several major ones, including
three of the ten biggest. Because those markets are
firmly established, however, their growth tends to be
slower than those where bottled water has a less deeply
18

BWR

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

entrenched tradition. Some of the most prominent
continental countries experienced contraction or only
very slight growth. For instance, during the five-year
period ending with 2012, Italy’s volume declined by
1.4 percent. Germany, the eighth-largest bottled water
market in the world, had a CAGR of just 0.6 percent,
and ninth-place France moved even slower. As a group,
the trio of leading European bottled water markets
accounted for 12.3 percent of the world’s total volume
in 2012. (A fourth European market, Spain, ranked
among the top ten until 2012, when rapidly rising India
supplanted it.)
Still water accounts for the majority of bottled water sales
in much of the world. Sparkling water sales are strong in a

2012 STATISTICS
minority of countries—such as Argentina, Chile, Uruguay,
the Netherlands, and Germany—where sparkling water
is often tied to meal-consumption practices. On a global
level, sparkling water accounts for an estimated 10 percent
of the total volume, with still water accounting for the
remaining 90 percent.
Plastic packaging is preferred over glass in almost every
country, with the exception of Germany where recycling
laws make a determinative impact on packaging trends.
Even in Germany and other countries where glass has a
strong presence, such as the United Kingdom, PET is the
most dynamic and rapidly growing segment. At about onethird of global volume, HOD still accounts for a minority of

The United
States and
Mexico
accounted for
26.6 percent of
the world’s packaged
water market in 2012.

HOD is a vital
segment in Mexico,
where it accounts for
more than two-thirds
of the volume.

global bottled water sales. Yet it is a vital segment in many
countries, such as Mexico, where it accounts for more than
two-thirds of the volume.
Year after year, Mexico leads the world in bottled water
per capita consumption, and that didn’t change even after
China surpassed it in absolute volume. Average intake in
Mexico jumped from 54.1 gallons in 2007 to 68.4 gallons
five years later. Per capita consumption in China stood
almost ten times lower, at approximately 7 gallons, in 2012.
The not-long-ago leader in average intake, Italy, consumed
the equivalent of 47.4 gallons per person in 2012.
Several Middle Eastern markets rank very highly in per
capita bottled water consumption. With the equivalent of
more than 35 gallons for each resident in 2012, the United
Arab Emirates (UAE) had the fifth-highest level of bottled
water consumption in the world. In addition to the UAE,
the Middle East region has Lebanon and Saudi Arabia in
the top 20 in per capita bottled water consumption. At
20.9 gallons per resident, Israel also consumes bottled water at a rate greater than the global average, though it didn’t
make it onto the top-20 list.
Although Europe no longer held the top spot in volume
per capita, 11 of the top 20 bottled water consumers on
a per person basis were European countries as of 2012.
The consumers of the combined market of BelgiumLuxembourg imbibed almost 38 gallons each, a rate that
declined very slightly over the years. France, Germany,
Spain, and Italy were the other European countries with
per capita consumption greater than 30 gallons. French
consumers quaffed 0.8 gallons less of bottled water in
2012 than they had five years earlier. In 2012, Germany
and Spain had per capita consumption rates of 34.3 and
31.2 gallons respectively, putting them in seventh and
ninth place in terms of average bottled water intake.
Unlike France and Spain, Germany consumed more
bottled water per person in 2012 than it had five years
20

BWR

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

before. Hungary, which ranked eleventh, also increased
its bottled water consumption. While markets in the
West hold the highest numbers, Eastern Europe can
claim several spots among the top 20 in per capita
bottled water consumption, although Bulgaria fell off
the bottom of the list in 2009, when China’s special administrative region of Hong Kong displaced it. Croatia
and Slovenia both consumed the equivalent of about
28 gallons per resident. Austria held the No. 18 spot in
2012, just ahead of Poland.
While Asian nations attained prominence among the
world’s bottled water markets when measured in total
volume, the most populous countries generally do not have
high per-person intake levels. Thailand stood among the
top 20 in terms of per capita bottled water consumption
with 50 gallons in 2012. Hong Kong made the list for the
first time as its average intake approached 22 gallons in
2009 and continued to increase per capita consumption
subsequently, hitting 27.9 gallons in 2012. Despite its
status as the second-largest market, mainland China had
a per capita consumption number well below the global
norm even though intake swelled by more than 3 gallons
per person—nearly doubling from 2007 to 2012.
Americans’ 2012 per capita bottled water consumption put
the United States in the No. 10 position among the countries of the world, between Lebanon and Hungary.

Into the Future
Beverage Marketing expects bottled water, having put
the weaknesses of the late 2000s behind it, to continue
enlivening the U.S. multiple beverage marketplace during the second decade of the 21st century much as it did
previously. The total amount of liquid Americans annually
consume will remain stable, resulting in overall volume
growth in line with population increases. Bottled water
is likely to grow noticeably faster, unlike carbonated soft
drinks, which will stay stagnant. Most other major beverage categories, including coffee, milk, and tea, are likely
to grow much more slowly than bottled water, which is
poised to achieve still another high in per capita consumption in the years ahead.

John G. Rodwan, Jr., is editorial director at Beverage
Marketing Corporation, a New York-based research,
consulting, and financial services firm dedicated to
the global beverage industry. Beverage Marketing
publishes numerous market reports on bottled water
and other beverages. For more information, visit www.
beveragemarketing.com and www.beverageforum.com.

THE 85-3

T
A
H
W

E
H
T
L
S AL

E
S
I
NO
G
N
I
R
A
E
H
R
E
OV
?
N
O
I
T
C
E
T
O
R
P

By Adele L. Abrams, Esq., CMSP

Occupational hearing loss has become a silent epidemic in the United States,
and its impact on workers’ quality of life (and on employers’ workers’
compensation claim costs) cannot be ignored.
Losing one’s hearing due to occupational exposure is certainly not something to be viewed
as a “cost of doing business.” According to the
American Academy of Audiology, the average,
otherwise healthy, person will have essentially
normal hearing at least up to age 60 if his or her
unprotected ears are not exposed to high noise
levels—i.e., levels above 85 decibels (dB) on the
“A” scale, which is the human hearing range.
The American National Standards Institute
reports that the median material hearing

impairment is only 17 dB and 12 dB for males
and females, respectively. Aging alone should
not prevent the average person from enjoying
normal hearing throughout all or most of his
or her working career. Unfortunately, that is
not the case for those who are occupationally
exposed to high noise levels. Estimates suggest
that there are upwards of 5 million, perhaps as
many as 30 million, Americans occupationally
exposed to noise levels greater than 85 dBA—
the “action limit” for the Occupational Safety
JUNE/JULY 2013

BWR

21

“
”
THE TERM 85-3 REPRESENTS

THE USE OF AN EIGHT-HOUR
EXPOSURE OF NOISE AT
85 DECIBELS ON THE A-SCALE
EXPOSURE LIMIT AND A 3 DECIBEL
DOUBLING RATE TO DETERMINE
NOISE DOSE.
and Health Administration (OSHA).
At the current OSHA exposure limits,
one in four of these workers will develop a permanent hearing loss. Many
of these workers, perhaps a majority,
will also develop tinnitus in addition to
a hearing loss. There can be ancillary issues as well; some research suggests that
sensory impairment, such as hearing
loss, can place workers at greater risk for
other occupational injuries.
To address this hearing loss epidemic,
there is an ongoing “85-3” campaign
being promoted by the National
Hearing Conservation Association
(NHCA), along with such safety
and health organizations as the
American Society of Safety Engineers,
the National Safety Council, and
the American Industrial Hygiene
Association. It is also backed by a
number of academic institutions as well
as the Laborers’ Health and Safety Fund
of North America and the Center for
Protection of Workers Rights. This is part
of a grassroots effort to prevent noiseinduced hearing loss in the workplace.

Healthy Ear Regulations
The term “85-3” represents two
numbers that form the basis for noise
exposure limits for preventing hearing
loss. Because hearing loss is always
a potential issue for bottled water
industry employers and their workers,
22

BWR

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

given the loud noises made by powered
industrial trucks and other machinery
in the work environment, employers
would be well-served to become familiar
with the 85-3 approach.
In the 85-3 campaign, the “85” represents the use of an eight-hour exposure
of noise at 85 decibels on the A-scale
(dBA) exposure limit, at which point
hearing loss prevention efforts are
required under occupational health
best practices. The “3” stands for a 3 dB
time-intensity exchange rate. As NHCA
describes it: “for every 3 dB increase in
average noise exposure level, the allowable exposure duration is halved.” Put
another way, an exposure of 88 dBA for
4 hours would be equivalent to the same
eight-hour exposure at 85 dBA.
Federal OSHA currently uses a 90-5
criterion, but that does not appear
sufficiently protective of workers’
hearing in work environments with
pervasive exposure to noise.
Even absent the 85-3 campaign, however,
OSHA has become more aggressive in
enforcement of its noise standard (29
CFR 1910.95), and the agency is assessing higher penalties against employers
who overexpose workers above the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 90 dBA
in an eight-hour period or who fail to
enroll workers in a Hearing Conservation

Program (HCP) if they are exposed
at the action level of 85 dBA. The
penalties for such infractions, if deemed
“willful,” can reach $70,000 per affected
employee. The eight components of
a successful hearing loss prevention
program include: noise exposure monitoring, engineering and administrative
controls, audiometric evaluation, use
of hearing protection devices, education and motivation, record keeping,
program evaluation, and program audit.
That is what OSHA will look for if its
representatives visit your workplace for
a routine inspection or as a result of an
employee complaint.
The 85-3 campaign is not a unique concept: many countries around the world
use this system for worker protection,
including most of the Canadian provinces, the European Union, Australia,
the United Kingdom, Mexico, China,
Japan, and multiple countries in South
America. In fact, up until now, the
United States has been unique among
industrialized nations in using a
“90-5” approach for OSHA compliance. However, the National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) has advocated an 85-3 recommended exposure limit since 1998.
NIOSH reports the following interesting workplace noise statistics:
•

Four million workers go to work each
day in damaging noise.

•

Ten million people in the United States
have a noise-related hearing loss.

•

Twenty-two million workers are exposed to potentially damaging noise
each year.

Reported cases of hearing loss
accounted for approximately 14
percent of occupational illnesses.

THE 85-3

•

Approximately 82 percent of the
cases involving occupational hearing
loss are reported among workers in
the manufacturing sector.

NIOSH has found that with a 40-year
lifetime exposure at the 85-dBA exposure limit, the excess risk of developing
occupational noise-induced hearing
loss is 8 percent—considerably lower
than the 25 percent excess risk at the
90-dBA PEL currently enforced by
OSHA. (For more information, read
NIOSH’s “Criteria for a Recommended
Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure” at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/
docs/98-126/pdfs/98-126.pdf.) When
appropriate hearing protection is not
made available and used by employees,
material impairment can result due
to excessive exposure to noise and the
failure to utilize appropriate hearing
protection equipment (such as properly
rated ear plugs, ear muffs etc.). In addition, too many employers fail to have new
employees tested to establish a “baseline”
audiometric examination. Thus, when
an employee is later tested and found to
have hearing impairment, there will be a
presumption for worker’s compensation
purposes that it is occupationally induced
if the worker has been exposed to high
noise levels in the workplace.
Regular audiometric testing, after the
initial baseline is established, can help
to promptly identify individuals whose
hearing may be affected as well as job
positions that are at greater risk. Such
testing can help protect workers from
further diminution of their hearing, and
engineering or administrative changes
can be made in the workplace to limit
the amount of noise—or at least the
periods of noise exposure—and prevent
further hearing loss. If the employer
lacks in-house expertise on this issue, a
qualified safety professional or audiologist can assist in many ways, including
the following: conducting sampling and
workplace audits to identify problem

sources of noise, training workers and
management on noise issues, making
recommendations on appropriate hearing
protection for various tasks, and assisting
in developing hearing conservation and
worksite safety and health programs
that can identify and ameliorate the
noise-hazardous conditions.
OSHA has not yet tightened its noise
PEL through formal rulemaking, but
there have been suggestions that the
rule should be modified to either lower
the exposure limit or mandate the use
of engineering controls and administrative controls (e.g., job rotation) to
abate violations, rather than allowing
companies to rely upon personal protective equipment.
In 2010, OSHA issued a policy that
would have imposed this requirement
and redefined what it considered to be
“economically feasible” for abatement
of excessive noise [“Interpretation of
Provisions for Feasible Administrative
or Engineering Controls of Occupational Noise,” (OSHA-2010-0032; 75
FR 69472)] but that policy was later
rescinded after objections by those who
noted that there were due process issues
with doing so via policy instead of formal notice-and-comment rulemaking.

Clearly though, the issue has OSHA’s
attention and, by getting on board with
the 85-3 campaign early, companies will
be well positioned to comply with lower
exposure limits in the future.
Companies can show their support for
the 85-3 campaign by linking to the
campaign website, and sharing information with your employees, contractors,
and colleagues. For more information
on the campaign, link to http://www.
hearingconservation.org/displaycommon.
cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=142. Companies interested in becoming part of
this project should send a letter on
its letterhead, signed by an authorized
representative of the company, to
85noise@gmail.com. They should be
willing to have the company name listed
on the 85-3 website and must include
relevant excerpts from the company noise
policy that demonstrates the use of 85-3.

Adele L. Abrams is the president of
The Law Office of Adele L. Abrams
PC, a full-service law firm, focusing on
occupational and mine safety and health,
employment, and environmental law. For
more, contact Abrams (safetylawyer@aol.
com) or visit www.safety-law.com.
JUNE/JULY 2013

BWR

23

A Call to Action for Water Cooler
Manufacturers, Distributors,
and Suppliers
By Daniel Felton, IBWA Vice President
of Government Relations

We talk often in government relations
about building and maintaining relationships with legislators and regulators.
Why? Most obviously because we need
those decision makers to know more
about you, your companies, and the
bottled water industry. That knowledge
will hopefully guide them toward a
better understanding of how the laws
and regulations they have to consider
will impact you—their constituents—
and the bottled water market. Without
knowing the facts about our industry,
legislators and regulators may be guided
by assumptions or, worse, misinformation
provided to them by our adversaries.
IBWA members are to be commended
for the fantastic job they have done in
recent years to build and maintain relationships with local, state, and federal
legislators and regulators.
While establishing those relationships
is important, it’s just as important to
know if and when to call on those same
24

BWR

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

decision makers to assist you with a particular industry issue. Starting up those
(sometimes hard) discussions will be
far easier if you’ve already created solid
working relationships—you’ll be able to
get right to the heart of the issue at hand.
Because you’ve already invested time
and energy getting to know and support
the decision makers, that effort will not
be lost on them when the time comes
for you to knock on their door with a
specific “ask.” And that time is now.

ENERGY STAR’s
New Requirements
As you are probably aware, IBWA staff
has been working for nearly two years
with many water cooler manufacturer
and distributor members to provide
comments and feedback to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
on new energy specification and testing
requirements for ENERGY STAR certified water coolers. While IBWA has been

able to secure a satisfactory outcome on
some aspects of the new specification and
testing requirements, the standby energy
consumption value within the “Final
ENERGY STAR Version 2.0 Water
Cooler Specification” released last May
is unacceptable to IBWA members. In
fact, meeting that new standard, which is
scheduled to go into effect February 2014,
may be next to impossible for water cooler
manufacturers to meet in a cost-effective
and efficient manner.
The standby energy consumption
value under the current specification
is 1.2 kilowatt hours per day (kwh/
day), while the value under the new
specification will be nearly 30 percent
lower at 0.87 kwh/day. Furthermore,
under the new ENERGY STAR
specification, EPA is insisting that
bottled water companies can no longer
retrieve a previously certified water
cooler unit from a customer and then
clean, sanitize, or refurbish that unit

GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
and put it back out in the marketplace
with any customer unless it meets the
new specification. That is inconsistent
with how EPA has allowed previously
certified units to be “grandfathered”
under existing specifications.
If you manufacturer, sell, or distribute
bottle or point-of-use (POU) water
coolers to your customers—or act as
a supplier in some capacity for water
coolers and related products—you
should care about this issue. If the home
and delivery (HOD) segment of the
bottled water industry is not able to
cost-effectively and efficiently offer its
customers the water cooler products
they are used to receiving, sales may
drop. That would of course be a negative result for the entire bottled water
industry. Although ENERGY STAR
is a voluntary program, there are some
states (e.g., California and Oregon)
that already have laws requiring water
coolers sold in those states to mirror
ENERGY STAR standby energy consumption standards. Those states may
very likely update their laws in the near
future to reflect the new ENERGY
STAR standard, thereby making a voluntary requirement at the federal level a
legal requirement at the state level.

HELP EDUCATE EPA AND CONGRESS
ABOUT THIS WATER COOLER ISSUE.
with you, as well as review the specific
“asks.” We need you to capitalize on the
relationships you have built with your
legislators and regulators during the
last several years to make sure they
understand the industry’s perspective.
Our message will be far more powerful
if it comes from you—the constituent—rather than IBWA staff. If you
have not yet established strong working
relationships with your legislators and
regulators, it’s certainly not too late to
introduce yourself. IBWA has many
tools and resources available to assist
you as you set out to introduce yourself
and the bottled water industry’s issues
to decision makers. The more legislators
and regulators who hear your voice on

our current ENERGY STAR standby
energy consumption concern, the more
effective your efforts could be.
We have a real opportunity here
to effect and change a regulation that
could impose a drastic and onerous
requirement on your company and the
bottled water industry as a whole. It will
take a concentrated effort with a strong
and unified industry voice to be successful. But still, there is a sense of achievement in knowing that all the time and
energy you’ve invested in getting to
know your legislators and regulators
could have a major influence on the final
outcome. That is significant. The time is
here and the time is now. We hope you
will join this call to action.

OzOne IntegratIOn
FOr BOttLeD Water

How to Take Action
IBWA staff is currently working with
members, federal counsel, and thirdparty allies to develop and implement
strategies to seek legislative and/
or regulatory relief from the new
ENERGY STAR standby energy
consumption requirement before it goes
into effect next year. IBWA invites all
members to accept this “call to action”
and assist us by reaching out to your
federal legislators and regulators in the
near future to explain our concerns and
tell them how they can help.
IBWA staff has prepared all the background information and talking points
you’ll need, so if you want assistance let
us know and we’ll share those documents

America’s
National Parks
By Chris Hogan,
IBWA Vice President
of Communications

As spring’s flowers give way to summer’s heat, Americans and travelers
from around the world are visiting
our country’s amazing network of
historic national parks. Whether
hiking along soaring peaks or taking
photos of deep ravines, guests will
find that the National Park System
(NPS) is the custodian of some of
greatest terrestrial treasures in the
United States. When park visitors
arrive at any destination administered
by the NPS, they might also notice a
lack of bottled water products available to meet their hydration needs.

Packaging a Message
Some activist groups are determined
to see bottled water completely banned
from America’s national parks. In fact,
a few “national park units”—the term
26

BWR

WWW.BOTTLEDWATER.ORG

used to describe the various types of
sites NPS manages, historic sites as well
as nature parks—have already restricted
or banned consumer access to bottled
water. An odd choice given that the
NPS has implemented a healthy foods
strategy as part of its “Healthy Parks
Healthy People” program.
One would think that, rather than
limiting consumer access to bottled
water—the healthiest packaged beverage
on the shelf—the NPS would propose
more ways to increase the availability of
clean, safe drinking water in national parks,
especially if other packaged beverages
are sold on site. Such efforts would
complement campaigns to promote
healthy hydration, which might include
bottle refilling stations and water
fountains located throughout the parks.
Access to bottled water is a key component

of healthy hydration for “healthy people,” so
it should not be discouraged, prohibited, or
overlooked when discussing water’s role in
a healthier lifestyle.
To ban or restrict access to bottled
water in the U.S. national parks robs
consumers of the right to purchase
healthy, reliable, zero-calorie, caffeine-free,
additive-free bottled water where other
packaged beverages are sold. In fact, it
forces consumers to choose less-healthy
drink options that are proven to have
more packaging, more additives (e.g.,
sugar, caffeine), and greater environmental impact than bottled water.
Industry research shows that when
bottled water isn’t available, 63 percent
of people will choose soda or another
sugary drink—not tap water. It is logical
to expect the same consumer response if
access to bottled water is restricted in the
NPS. And I haven’t seen any research
that shows restricting the sale of bottled
water will reduce the presence of plastic
bottles within the recycling streams of
our national parks—a concern voiced by
anti-bottled water groups.
It would seem those anti-bottled water groups are using the NPS to further
their attacks on bottled water—rather
than allowing national parks to continue providing guests with a variety of
convenient, plastic-packaged beverages
—including bottled water—to quench
their thirst. Opponents of bottled water
remain vehement in their attacks on
our products and in their inaccurate
claims designed to scare and mislead
consumers. (As an example, one recent
campaign promoted messaging such
as “10 Reasons Why National Parks
Should Buck the Bottle,” a webpage that
presents numerous false and misleading
claims about bottled water.)

Truthful Dialogue
To correct the misinformation
distributed by those groups, IBWA
issued a press release detailing the
importance of keeping bottled water

COMMUNICATIONS
available to all consumers and countering
inaccurate statements. (Visit http://bit.
ly/USparksBW to read that release.)
IBWA has also participated in several
interviews for national stories on the
NPS and bottled water debate. When
talking with reporters, we make sure to
present the facts about the bottled water
industry’s continued strong support of
our environment and natural resources.
(Some audiences are surprised to learn
that bottled water’s environmental
footprint is the lowest of any packaged
beverage according to a life cycle assessment conducted by Quantis in 2010.
In the 2009 Life Cycle Inventory report
conducted by Franklin Associates to
determine the environmental footprint
of the U.S. bottled water industry,
IBWA found similar results.) In addition, IBWA has proactively responded
to anti-bottled water comments on a
camping and recreation news website
whose members are active national parks
users. (To join that online conversation,
visit http://bit.ly/bwtraveler.)
As a result of IBWA’s efforts, the
National Park Hospitality Association
(NPHA)—which represents concessionaires who provide lodging, food
services, gifts and souvenirs, equipment
rentals, transportation, and other visitor
services in the NPS—contacted IBWA
about working together. NPHA members have a combined workforce of nearly
25,000—mostly frontline, visitor-contact
jobs—and provide in excess of $1.1
billion in goods and services to visitors
annually. NPHA members operate in
more than 100 park units and generate
more than $100 million annually for the
National Park Service budget.
In IBWA’s discussions with
NPHA staff, we’re reviewing ways
our organizations can work together
to support the continued availability
of bottled water within the NPS.
Although we’re still in the early stages,
the brainstorming has resulted in some
inspiring plans for possible future

BANNING BOTTLED WATER
FORCES CONSUMERS TO
CHOOSE LESS-HEALTHY DRINK
OPTIONS PROVEN TO HAVE MORE
PACKAGING, MORE ADDITIVES, AND
GREATER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
collaborations. IBWA is looking forward
to discovering with NPHA new ways
we can work together to try to ensure
bottled water remains available at all
national park units.
IBWA is also working closely
with its federal lobbying counsel to
develop and implement a strategy to
confirm anecdotal information IBWA
has received indicating that plastic
waste reduction in parks that have
implemented bans has been minimal

and soda sales have actually increased.
If verifiable data can be obtained,
IBWA may then be able to work with
some members of Congress to request
the NPS to provide the results of any
implemented bottled water bans in
terms of plastic waste reduction, soda
and bottled water consumption changes,
etc., and then also perhaps encourage the
NPS to rethink the policy it has in place
that allows parks to implement bottled
water sales restrictions.

During the past severeal years,
IBWA members have worked hard
to strengthen their environmental
sustainability efforts, and IBWA
has tried to highlight the small
environmental footprint of the
bottled water industry. IBWA gained
momentum in these efforts with
the publication of our 2009 Life
Cycle Inventory report, multiple
light-weighting studies, production
of IBWA’s 2020 Sustainability
Goals document, and the work
the Environmental Sustainability
Committee has done to highlight
and support the environmental best
practices of the industry. However,
IBWA also knows that the bottled
water industry must stay forever vigilant
in its efforts to enhance the industry’s
sustainability practices.
Oftentimes, the best way to encourage sustainable practices is to promote
examples from the IBWA membership;
such examples can aid in “relate-ability”
and also inspire innovation within other
companies. With that in mind, IBWA
has solicited “environmental success stories” from members, and this coverage of
Portola Packaging, Inc. is the second in
the series. (Danone Waters was the first,
featured in the Dec 2012/Jan 2013 issue
of Bottled Water Reporter.)
Portola Packaging is one of the largest
manufacturers of tamper-evident plastic
closures and plastic containers for the
dairy, juice, bottled water, and food
industries. Portola is a leading manufacturer of tamper-evident closures for
5-gallon water bottles, which include
its standard Snap-On caps and also its
patented Non-Spill caps, with or without foam liners. In addition, Portola
Packaging Mexico offers a snap-screw
and screw caps for 5-gallon bottles.

Reduce, Recycle, Rethink
In a May 2013 press release, Portola
Packaging, Inc.’s North American

facilities announced that they reduced
energy usage by approximately 30
percent and recycled nearly 9 million
pounds of material during the past
three years. Portola reported that
it was able to measure a 9 percent
reduction in kilowatt hour usage in
2012—that was in addition to an 8
percent reduction in 2011 and a 10.5
percent decrease in 2010. Behind
those energy reduction achievements
were more than 20 different initiatives across all eight Portola North
American plants (participating in the
2012 initiatives were four U.S. facilities plus three Canadian plants and
one in Mexico). Those accomplishments included combined efforts to
locate and reduce heat and air losses,
corrugated case redesign, installing
higher efficiency compressors, and
removal of equipment functioning at
a lower efficiency but requiring more
energy input.
In 2012, Portola also evaluated its
production floor layout. Production
footprints that were found to be inefficient from a material delivery or energy
utilization perspective were modified.
Production from older, lower-efficiency
equipment was moved to newer, highercavitation machines. Modification of
some employee shift schedules also
helped reduce energy utilization and
improve efficiency.
In addition to energy reduction,
Portola plants recycled in excess of 3.4
million pounds of scrap resin in 2012.
Portola’s material recycling efforts also
extended to hydraulic oil waste, scrap
metal, aluminum cans, office paper, and
corrugated boxes.
Portola also is factoring source-reduction initiatives into its closure development. For example, last fall the company
launched its GreenLyte one-piece, highperformance closure for hot-fill beverage
products. The new one-piece closure line
replaces two-piece structures.

TECHNICAL UPDATE

PORTOLA PACKAGING PARTNERS
WITH CUSTOMERS TO DRIVE
DOWN THE COMPANY’S
ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT.

Commenting on those notable
achievements, Kevin Kwilinski,
president and chief executive officer
at Portola Packaging says, “Ultimately,
our objective is to create upstream
processes which utilize material in the
most efficient way possible. By doing so,
there is less need to recycle on the back
end. We also believe in partnering with
our customers and communities to help
make that happen.”
Partnering with customers to drive
down the company’s environmental
footprint and ultimately to yield
better business practices and smarter
business operations is a great way to
advance company sustainability and
support customer initiatives. Portola
continues to work with customers on
an individual basis to convert shipments
from corrugated boxes to Gaylord bulk
packaging, which typically enables 30 to
35 percent more closures per truckload.
The “Sustainability Advantages Through
Working With You” page of the Portola
website (www.portpack.com) explains
that using the Gaylords saves about 400
cases for every 3 million closures and
all the materials and carbon emissions
related to their manufacture, shipping,
and disposal.
Kwilinski also mentioned in the
Portola press release, “At Portola,
we believe that good environmental
stewardship is an ongoing process.
As such, we have engaged all of our
employees in the process to reuse,

YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL
SUCCESS STORY HERE
IBWA applauds Portola
Packaging’s environmental efforts
and invites all IBWA members
to submit their companies’
environmental success story (via
press release or by answering
a simple questionnaire) for the
opportunity to be featured in the
Bottled Water Reporter to IBWA
Director of Science and Research
Tamika Sims, PhD:
tsims@bottledwater.org.

reduce, and recycle. We encourage all
of our team members to generate new,
environmentally-sound ideas so that
we can continue on this path.”
In addition to Portola’s North
American efforts, the company’s three
international manufacturing plants
(United Kingdom, Czech Republic, and
Russia) are also working on a parallel
environmental stewardship path.
To read more about the sustainable
activity at Portola, be sure to visit its
website: www.portpack.com/
sustainability-main.html.

JUNE/JULY 2013

BWR

29

CPO QUIZ

IBWA

certified plant operators (CPOs) are encouraged to complete the
following quiz for Â˝ IBWA continuing education unit (CEU). The
questions are derived from material presented in this issue of the
Bottled Water Reporter, the IBWA Plant Technical Reference Manual, and the IBWA Bottled
Water Code of Practice. Submit this quiz to Claire Crane, IBWA Education and Technical Program
Coordinator, 1700 Diagonal Road, Suite 650, Alexandria, VA 22134. Look for additional quizzes
in future issues and earn additional IBWA CEUs!
Name______________________________________________________

Company_ _________________________________________________

Address____________________________________________________

City_______________________________________________________

State/Province_ _____________________________________________

ZIP/Postal Code_ ___________________________________________

Check your selection for each question

1|

Bottled water from well tapping a confined aquifer in
which the water level stands at some height above
the top of the aquifer is called _____.

OO
OO
OO
OO

artesian water
purified water
ground water
purified water

2|

Water defined in the 23rd revision of the U.S.
Pharmacopeia is called _____.

OO
OO
OO
OO

spring water
dialysis water
purified water
water beverage

3|

The presence of Cryptosporidium parvum in water is
an indicator of possible _____.

VALUE OF IBWA MEMBERSHIP
WALTER HITCHCOCK
GENERAL MANAGER
LAUREL MOUNTAIN
NATURAL SPRING WATER
CHATTANOOGA | TN
ALL ABOUT
WALTER
Walter has spent most
of his career in the
beverage industry, but
he is also a proud Naval
Veteran.
When not working, he
likes to bass fish, serves
on community boards,
and is active with his
church.
Walter loves to have
a laugh and has an
unassuming sense of
humor that won him the
“most witty” title back
in high school.

When it comes to the bottled water industry trends in his town of Chattanooga,
Tennessee, Laurel Mountain National Spring Water’s General Manager Walter
Hitchcock has noticed a definite uptick in the number of people choosing HOD
for their homes.
Hitchcock attributes that development to two factors: 1) people are more health conscious and thus are choosing water over other beverages, and 2) HOD offers bottled
water packaged in convenient, eco-friendly, returnable, recyclable, 5-gallon bottles.
As a former route salesman and route manager for Coca-Cola, Hitchcock says his company’s IBWA membership gives him and his customers the assurance that every aspect of
his products and services is about quality: “IBWA is a guiding force in all things quality.
And we tout our IBWA membership in our advertisements and brochures.”
Hitchcock says that when he is sourcing new equipment for his plant, he always looks
to the Buyers’ Guide edition of IBWA’s Bottled Water Reporter magazine. “The Buyers’
Guide has always helped me when I want to purchase equipment, such as coolers,
accessories, such as stands, etc. It has always been a tremendous help,” he says.
Also helpful is the association’s weekly e-newsletter, IBWA News Splash, which
Hitchcock reads and takes note of not only issues affecting him directly in Tennessee
but also what is happening in other states. “What happens in another state may be
coming to your state soon: issues, taxes on bottled water—there’s always something.
When you are up-to-date on what is going on in Minnesota, then you realize that
could happen in your state too. It just gives you a greater awareness and an opportunity
to be proactive about what might be coming down the pipe.”
Hitchcock says, “The information that IBWA provides totally gives a company the opportunity to stay informed and know what is happening in the industry on a weekly basis. IBWA
advocates on our behalf, not only in the state seats but also in Congress and the Senate,
because they are the decision makers setting legislation that will affect our industry.”
Laurel Mountain Natural Spring Water, a premium award-winning bottled water
distributor owned by Chattanooga Coco-Cola Bottling Company, distributes both
HOD (50 percent) and single-serve PET (50 percent) bottled water. Its water source
is a spring owned by J & J Waterworks, LLC.